Goriginal Content

EoD - Smash Wii U!

Shantae review!

Fantasy Life review

EoD - Instagram fun

Xeodrifter diary #12

GN Podcast #479
 

Developers discuss the next-gen nature of the Wii U

ZombiU senior scriptwriter Gabrielle Shrager:

“Next-gen? Or Next-next-gen? Depends what you mean by that. With the Wii U, Nintendo has definitely recognized the importance of fast chips speeds and cutting-edge graphics, but that is not the hart and soul of the machine.”

Frozenbyte’s Mikael Haveri:

“Wii U is next-gen in the way the Wii was. Clearly revolutionary in many ways, but possibly slightly less on the pure power side. It is a reasonable guess that the next round of competition will trump the specs by a bit, but the important question is if they will also implement a touch interface. So in this way the GamePad is the most important new addition, clearly combining the console experience with the now-very-popular tablets. All of the games are designed whit the GamePad as an integral part, and if that proves to be even nearly as popular as the Wii Remote, then Nintendo might actually define next gen.”

FIFA 13 line producer Matt Prior:

“The Wii U is an exciting new piece of hardware that offer opportunities that other consoles can’t, simply because of the uniqueness of the platform, in particular the GamePad. We wanted to ensure that we utilized that uniqueness and delivered features that utilized the GamePad, not just in a gimmicky way but in ways that added real value and improvements to the game. Just as important, we wanted to use the power of the GamePad to open up the game to more gamers. Graphically, the Wii U is on par with the Xbox 360 and PS3, and we were even able to make some key graphical improvements.”

Mass Effect 3 external producer Melanie Faulknor:

“The way that the GamePad works, where you can take the game that you’re playing on the TV and instantly transition it onto the GamePad, I think that in itself is going to become a household standard, because if you are sharing a television, this constant fight for the TV is no longer an issue.”

Link

Also check out:
Discussion Preview
31 total comments (View all)
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 01:04

metalpants wrote:Between Trine 2, Nintendo Land, and Arkham City I'd say all my graphical power worries have vanished. Epic said that UE 4 is "supremely scalable" (even to iPhone level) which obviously means Wii U can use it. But if UE 3.9 is any indication ( http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xhhlt8 ... OEY3WyoE4c ) and Arkham City already gives off that UE 3.9 kind of vibe, then I expect Wii U games to look incredible down the line.


Two ports and nintendoland aren't the best indication of it. Also epic still is just saying that unreal 3 is good enough for the Wii U which is sad.

I dunno I guess having 3.9 is fine but with rumors of Microsoft working with unreal4 for launch titles it doesn't make me confident of the Wii U's longevity.



Hopefully I'm wrong,
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 01:15

I think I'm going to write a tutorial explaining "how to ask questions", because these journalists don't know how to do it.

Lesson 1: How to ask if the Wii U is a next-gen console or not.

- So, the Wii U a next-gen console? Look, I don't wanna know about the Gamepad, I don't wanna about the philosophy behind your game, I just want to know if the Wii U can do better visuals than the Xbox 360 and PS3. How powerful is it?

Lesson 2: How to interview Reggie.

- So, Reggie, Xenoblade sold very well and Last Story was the biggest commercial success of XSEED Games. And, as a bonus, these two titles didn't have any kind of marketing here. You didn't spend one cent to promote them. So, I think that it's absolutety clear that Japanese games can sell very well here. With the Wii U, are still going to support Japanese games? It's a YES or NO question. If your answer is NO, tell me why, what's your reason act this way? Because, c'mon, you don't even need to translate the freakin' games, Nintendo Europe always do this for us. So, why you still don't want to release them? Why?

- Ok, Reggie, we didn't get Disaster, we didn't get Pandora's Tower, we didn't get Fatal Frame 4 and Fatal Frame 2 Remake. When are you going to release these games in HD for the Wii U? I'm not asking if you are going to do this, I'm asking WHEN are you going to do it? These would sell well, the Wii U don't have many games, so it's easy money for you and great games for us. When are you going to do it?

That's how a real journalists should act. Ask want the people want to know.
No Avatar
31 Dec 2012 01:24

shingi70 wrote:Two ports and nintendoland aren't the best indication of it. Also epic still is just saying that unreal 3 is good enough for the Wii U which is sad.

I dunno I guess having 3.9 is fine but with rumors of Microsoft working with unreal4 for launch titles it doesn't make me confident of the Wii U's longevity.



Hopefully I'm wrong,

I think he was saying that he was happy with how those ports turned out and that he's expecting even better in the future.

As for UE4, that's an issue with Epic. See, Nintendo isn't one to push hardware and Epic makes most of their money from selling engines that need that extra power in order to sell. Without that power, there would be no reason for UE4 to exist let alone for any developers to actually pay for it. That's why they don't want to bring it to Wii U. Not because it can't handle it but because Nintendo isn't pushing the power angle and without that angle UE is kind of pointless.

The reason it's on phones, even though it's not going to be the same engine, not really, is because they know that a lot of smaller developers don't have the funds to make their own engines and that at the speed that graphics are developing on phones it's going to be even harder for them to keep up as time goes on. So they release a cut down version because they're trying to get in on the ground floor of what they hope will be a very lucrative market. Of course someone forgot to mention to them that phone advancements are going to start slowing to a crawl unless someone comes up with a major breakthrough in battery life soon.

Either way everyone knows the engine would run perfectly fine on the Wii U, but they don't want to port it because they don't see it selling well enough, which is simply idiotic but when your product depends on power alone to sell you tend to do stupid things.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 01:25

@andrelol3

Don't think Disaster sold any good. And from the looks of it, neither is Pandora's Tower. Nice game though.

And from you grammar I don't think you should pick up journalism ;) Let's game!
No Avatar
31 Dec 2012 01:50

pretty sad that nintendo didn't future proof its console. make the console a step above xbox 360 and ps3 by making it be more stable and handle multiplatform games is a much more efficient way. same with the 3ds, which i think should of had a higher resolution than what it has now. nintendo personally in my opinion make bad decisions.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 02:38

rahnyc4 wrote:pretty sad that nintendo didn't future proof its console. make the console a step above xbox 360 and ps3 by making it be more stable and handle multiplatform games is a much more efficient way. same with the 3ds, which i think should of had a higher resolution than what it has now. nintendo personally in my opinion make bad decisions.


Them having over $10 billion in cash and Wii/DS dominating everything else last gen may say otherwise about "bad decisions".
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 02:52

Entity wrote:@andrelol3

Don't think Disaster sold any good. And from the looks of it, neither is Pandora's Tower. Nice game though.

And from you grammar I don't think you should pick up journalism ;) Let's game!


These two games didn't get any marketing in Europe, so, yeah, bad sales are expected. With some marketing they could sell very well. Last Story, for example, didn't do very well in Europe, but it sold a lot more here (and it was publish by a very small company). How about that?

And I'm sorry to inform you, but I'm not a native English speaker, I don't live an English speaking country, what a wrote was comment on the Internet not a formal text (so I didn't review it) and I'm not aiming to be a journalist in a English speaking country; so, yeah, don't worry about my grammar, people can understand what I write just fine.

And just to let you know, what you did there talking about my writing is called "argumentum ad hominem". I don't think you should be doing that, it's pretty stupid.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 03:23

andrelol3 wrote:
Entity wrote:@andrelol3

Don't think Disaster sold any good. And from the looks of it, neither is Pandora's Tower. Nice game though.

And from you grammar I don't think you should pick up journalism ;) Let's game!


These two games didn't get any marketing in Europe, so, yeah, bad sales are expected. With some marketing they could sell very well. Last Story, for example, didn't do very well in Europe, but it sold a lot more here (and it was publish by a very small company). How about that?

And I'm sorry to inform you, but I'm not a native English speaker, I don't live an English speaking country, what a wrote was comment on the Internet not a formal text (so I didn't review it) and I'm not aiming to be a journalist in a English speaking country; so, yeah, don't worry about my grammar, people can understand what I write just fine.

And just to let you know, what you did there talking about my writing is called "argumentum ad hominem". I don't think you should be doing that, it's pretty stupid.


Most people don't understand what it's like to have to communicate in a different language and they don't know how hard it is. Great job on your English thus far and keep it up.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 04:43

I'd like to see what Retro and Monolith are doing and I'd also like to see what we can expect to see in the future on the hardware when developers are making full use of the system, rather then quick ports and games rushed for launch.

I know for a fact what we've seen so far doesn't really use the gpu/cpu combo the way the system was designed to, so I'm personally really looking forward to seeing what's next.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 05:53

Sadly, most people do not consider the Wii U to be next gen. In fact, I STILL get surprised expressions when people find out I play games like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed on the "Wii."
And other gamers just laugh.


Nintendo really hurt themselves with the casual movement but I still support them and hope the general population comes around.

On another note, I'm really tired of people saying Rayman Origins is a title that shows the power of the Wii U.
Yes, it's beautiful but don't fool yourselves. It's a 2D platformer. A game like that could be made in Flash or HTML 5.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 06:12

andrelol3 wrote:
Entity wrote:@andrelol3

Don't think Disaster sold any good. And from the looks of it, neither is Pandora's Tower. Nice game though.

And from you grammar I don't think you should pick up journalism ;) Let's game!


These two games didn't get any marketing in Europe, so, yeah, bad sales are expected. With some marketing they could sell very well. Last Story, for example, didn't do very well in Europe, but it sold a lot more here (and it was publish by a very small company). How about that?

And I'm sorry to inform you, but I'm not a native English speaker, I don't live an English speaking country, what a wrote was comment on the Internet not a formal text (so I didn't review it) and I'm not aiming to be a journalist in a English speaking country; so, yeah, don't worry about my grammar, people can understand what I write just fine.

And just to let you know, what you did there talking about my writing is called "argumentum ad hominem". I don't think you should be doing that, it's pretty stupid.



Hey! I didn't mean to insult you. Was just a bad joke. Please accept my apologies. Really.

I have no idea why The Last Story sold so poorly though (here in Europe. I live in Norway). It's a great game and there are loads of Wii owners who would dig that game. And Xenoblade. Darn I love that game. But did it sell enough?

Anyways, back on-topic: The U is the first console in the next-gen, yes! End of story. Doesn't matter about the specs, Nintendo have started this-gen (now).


@ MetroidMan5000

Rayman is NOT the proof of hard specs on the U, but it shows that developers like UBi are already starting to understand some aspects of the system. Ancel was praising the memory and the GPU, so there might be something there? Give developers like those I mentioned a year, or even two, and we'll see better looking games (and not rushed for release). I know....We all know that Retro will be bringing some shiny eye-candy when we finally see their game! By that time we will have at least one more console on the market that will be somewhat stronger. But will those new consoles really be that much stronger than last-gen (PS360, since Wii U is this gen now ;) )
No Avatar
31 Dec 2012 06:46

andrelol3 wrote:I think I'm going to write a tutorial explaining "how to ask questions", because these journalists don't know how to do it.

Lesson 1: How to ask if the Wii U is a next-gen console or not.

- So, the Wii U a next-gen console? Look, I don't wanna know about the Gamepad, I don't wanna about the philosophy behind your game, I just want to know if the Wii U can do better visuals than the Xbox 360 and PS3. How powerful is it?
(...)
That's how a real journalists should act. Ask want the people want to know.

I don't like that aproach to interviewing people, like they owe you something. If I was a developer and some 19 year old blog writer came to me like that, I'd say "no more questions from this gentleman" and talk to journalists with social skills instead.

By the way, if you go into a thread all talking large ("I'm going to write a tutorial", "these journalists don't know how to do it", "that's how real journalists should act") you can't act like a shrinking violet if someone comments on your writing skills.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 07:21

Entity wrote:

@ MetroidMan5000

Rayman is NOT the proof of hard specs on the U, but it shows that developers like UBi are already starting to understand some aspects of the system. Ancel was praising the memory and the GPU, so there might be something there? Give developers like those I mentioned a year, or even two, and we'll see better looking games (and not rushed for release). I know....We all know that Retro will be bringing some shiny eye-candy when we finally see their game! By that time we will have at least one more console on the market that will be somewhat stronger. But will those new consoles really be that much stronger than last-gen (PS360, since Wii U is this gen now ;) )


Oh yeah, don't get me wrong. I love Ubi for supporting the Wii U. I just got AC3 and plan on buying ZombiU this week as well as Rayman when it comes out.

I just think it makes us look silly when we're running around using a 2D platformer as our claim to power.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 08:26

I recognise this from Games TM; I picked it up as it was the Wii U launch issue, and it's mostly one of the more reasonable publications out there. However, their articles of late have been disappointing to me, as have those of EDGE, as have those of Gamesmaster & CVG. I don't know why the games journalism world is so focused on power that they actually believe Wii U has no grunt behind it, and is a simple step up from current systems. Every issue of said publications I have read makes clear sweeping generalisations about specs and such (even Games TM stated that Rayman will have NFC features when it's not confirmed), to the point that by the time they are out, they are DEAD wrong. They use terms like 'embarrass' and 'steam-roll' when describing the next wave of consoles to hit, without even knowing the score with that hardware, not even 1%.

The Wii U does things differently. For gawd's sake it has enough power to run 2 screens, relies more on the GPU, out of order execution etc..... People need to give things a chance. It's no wonder the gaming world is turning on journalism they way it is, it seems filled with non-veterans and power whoring children of the 360.
No Avatar
31 Dec 2012 08:43

It's clearly 8th Generation in terms of timing. See the Wikipedia entry about console generations. However, I also think it's clearly within the realm of PS3 and 360 graphical prowess. It shows the effects of a few years' advancement -- more / slower RAM, faster GPGPU / slower CPU, nice tidy ICB, low power cosumption, etc.

But I think the evidence we've been presented with *SO FAR* shows it to be on par. Had it arrived in 2006, or had it been the Wii's hardware, it would have proven a worthy competitor to the others. Maybe upcoming first-party games will prove otherwise, but so far it seems to do about what the other machines do, with a 720p / 30fps / little to no anti-aliasing goal being common.

To be "next gen" in terms of power, I think, you're looking for nearly a level of magnitude increase. Somewhere on the order of 100% to 1000% as powerful. Give me 8 times the RAM (from 64MB to 512MB and from 512MB to 4GB *available for game content*), 8 times the fill rate, 8 times the polygon-handling, etc. The Wii U seems as if it might be 20% more powerful, far short of a doubling (100%) in power or a level of magnitude (1000%) increase in power. We'll see.

Of course we also don't know what an XBox 720 or PS4 game will look like. They could fall short of PC games and hardware you can go buy on 12/31/12. And in Nintendo's defense, it would have been quite a feat to handily leapfrog into XBox 720 territory in 2012 given that the Wii was about on par with the *first XBox*.
No Avatar
31 Dec 2012 09:55

kevynwight wrote:But I think the evidence we've been presented with *SO FAR* shows it to be on par.

- Wii U just released
- industry where developers don't take Nintendo hardware seriously
- running current PS360 software at launch
- AC3 cost a million or less to port (according to a Ubi rep who stated that none of their Wii U ports cost more than a million).

- 360 on it's 7th year
- PS3 on it's 6th year
- with early dev kits developers have had 8-9 years working with their hardware
- industry where anything Sony and MS do is taken seriously
- untold billions of dollars dumped into development
- high end games costing tens of millions of dollars to develop
- current games easily ported to Wii U at launch

Yeah...

It's certainly on par.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 11:36

andrelol3 wrote:
Lesson 1: How to ask if the Wii U is a next-gen console or not.

- So, the Wii U a next-gen console? Look, I don't wanna know about the Gamepad, I don't wanna about the philosophy behind your game, I just want to know if the Wii U can do better visuals than the Xbox 360 and PS3. How powerful is it?

but next-gen... doesn't only have to do with graphics?

(unless your post was sarcastic? I honestly can't tell)
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 13:55

I'm not going to take anything EA says seriously or with any credibility. I say this because last year, they were ALL up Nintendo's ass. Then, they're silent. I believe that fallout between Nintendo and EA did happen, so any plans for some good support from that company is pretty much going to be nearly non-existant. Gearbox Software already confirmed that the Wii U is ahead, so this whole "on par" with PS360 isn't true and needs to be left behind. We're over that and it has already been proven.

Anyhow, in regards to Wii U 3rd Party support, I wish it was the same and amazing as it was on DS and currently 3DS. Nintendo's handhelds tend to get the better and best games (and support) vs their home console. If only that same mindset and confidence was applied to Nintendo's home consoles...
No Avatar
31 Dec 2012 14:19

According to Trine 2 developer, the DC version of the game could not run on the PS3 and 360 without some sacrifices, so that in itself tells you it has more power than the PS3 and 360 and isnt just "on par". Also to anybody who saw the latest video of Pikmin 3 you would know just how beautiful that game was and would probably have more confidence in the console's power department.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 14:41

void3953 wrote:
kevynwight wrote:But I think the evidence we've been presented with *SO FAR* shows it to be on par.

- Wii U just released
- industry where developers don't take Nintendo hardware seriously
- running current PS360 software at launch
- AC3 cost a million or less to port (according to a Ubi rep who stated that none of their Wii U ports cost more than a million).

- 360 on it's 7th year
- PS3 on it's 6th year
- with early dev kits developers have had 8-9 years working with their hardware
- industry where anything Sony and MS do is taken seriously
- untold billions of dollars dumped into development
- high end games costing tens of millions of dollars to develop
- current games easily ported to Wii U at launch

Yeah...

It's certainly on par.


EXACTLY.
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 16:33

void3953 wrote:
As for UE4, that's an issue with Epic. See, Nintendo isn't one to push hardware and Epic makes most of their money from selling engines that need that extra power in order to sell. Without that power, there would be no reason for UE4 to exist let alone for any developers to actually pay for it. That's why they don't want to bring it to Wii U. Not because it can't handle it but because Nintendo isn't pushing the power angle and without that angle UE is kind of pointless.

The reason it's on phones, even though it's not going to be the same engine, not really, is because they know that a lot of smaller developers don't have the funds to make their own engines and that at the speed that graphics are developing on phones it's going to be even harder for them to keep up as time goes on. So they release a cut down version because they're trying to get in on the ground floor of what they hope will be a very lucrative market. Of course someone forgot to mention to them that phone advancements are going to start slowing to a crawl unless someone comes up with a major breakthrough in battery life soon.

Either way everyone knows the engine would run perfectly fine on the Wii U, but they don't want to port it because they don't see it selling well enough, which is simply idiotic but when your product depends on power alone to sell you tend to do stupid things.

Official UE support for the Wii U is only UE3 at this point in time. There was a comment from someone at Epic not long ago about why that is:

http://www.develop-online.net/features/ ... r-reaction
Epic has also kept quiet on whether Unreal Engine 4 will feature Wii U support, having only confirmed support for PC so far.

Epic EU territory manager Mike Gamble says however that the lack of announced compatibility is simply down to the Wii U launch falling within UE3’s timeframe, with development on the console’s titles having begun 18 months ago, before the studio revealed publicly its UE4 plans.

"Wii U is supported by UE3. The reason for that is that the Wii U happened to fall within the UE3 timeframe,” he says. “It was more about that timing than it was a decision based on hardware stats or console power or anything like that. It's because people started building games for Wii U 18 months or even two years ago, and so it had to be UE3."


Star Wars 1313 uses UE3 and is targeted for next gen systems. UE3 will probably be used into the next generation for a while like UE2 was. Since I don't think there have been any games that have been announced that use UE4, we'll have to wait to see if the Wii U gets those games. I haven't ever seen Epic say that the Wii U can't run UE4 or that it will never be on it and due to how scalable it is, it's likely that eventually some game will make use of it on the Wii U.
No Avatar
31 Dec 2012 18:39

lockNES wrote:Star Wars 1313 uses UE3 and is targeted for next gen systems. UE3 will probably be used into the next generation for a while like UE2 was. Since I don't think there have been any games that have been announced that use UE4, we'll have to wait to see if the Wii U gets those games. I haven't ever seen Epic say that the Wii U can't run UE4 or that it will never be on it and due to how scalable it is, it's likely that eventually some game will make use of it on the Wii U.

True, but Epic is going to want developers to upgrade to their new engine sooner than later so they can charge them for it. And what happens then with Wii U support? Any game running on UE4 will basically be out of the Wii U's reach if the engine is never even released for it in the first place whether or not the system can run them. It's been announced for everything from PCs to the iPhone. There is absolutely no reason why they haven't announced a Wii U version yet if it's ever going to happen. Remember that UE3 could run on the Wii, some developers actually did go through the effort themselves to port it, and yet there was never an official version for the system even though it was officially released for the iPhone.

Until Epic officially announces it and is willing to support it, it's not coming.

But why would they not announce their engine for a system that, even by their own admission, is perfectly capable of running it? They said the timing wasn't right for UE4 before, but what's been stopping them since then?
No Avatar
31 Dec 2012 19:16

void3953 wrote:
Yeah...

It's certainly on par.

Actually the XBox 360 is now in its 8th year. And the PS3 is in its 7th. Like I said, what we've seen so far shows it to be on par. That may certainly change, but I stand by my assertion that it has the hallmarks of being incrementally more powerful than its predecessors, rather than the level of magnitude you might expect.

I look forward to seeing what it can do!
User avatar
31 Dec 2012 21:05

void3953 wrote:
lockNES wrote:Star Wars 1313 uses UE3 and is targeted for next gen systems. UE3 will probably be used into the next generation for a while like UE2 was. Since I don't think there have been any games that have been announced that use UE4, we'll have to wait to see if the Wii U gets those games. I haven't ever seen Epic say that the Wii U can't run UE4 or that it will never be on it and due to how scalable it is, it's likely that eventually some game will make use of it on the Wii U.

True, but Epic is going to want developers to upgrade to their new engine sooner than later so they can charge them for it. And what happens then with Wii U support? Any game running on UE4 will basically be out of the Wii U's reach if the engine is never even released for it in the first place whether or not the system can run them. It's been announced for everything from PCs to the iPhone. There is absolutely no reason why they haven't announced a Wii U version yet if it's ever going to happen. Remember that UE3 could run on the Wii, some developers actually did go through the effort themselves to port it, and yet there was never an official version for the system even though it was officially released for the iPhone.

Until Epic officially announces it and is willing to support it, it's not coming.

But why would they not announce their engine for a system that, even by their own admission, is perfectly capable of running it? They said the timing wasn't right for UE4 before, but what's been stopping them since then?

The Samaritan Demo basically shows they aren't ready to kill off UE3 just yet because it was running on several high-end graphics cards at the time and was only shown off back in 2011. Why put all that money and development into an engine that that don't plan on supporting for a few more years? The reason they've been hyping up UE4 is because they want developers to start moving over sooner than later. The UE4 demo didn't really show anything that was significantly more impressive than the Samaritan demo and UE3 is compatible with DX11. It's basically ready for next-gen. Even if they stop officially supporting it in order to get people to move over to UE4, developers that are really familiar with it will probably use it to make games for the current consoles and/or the next.

I don't remember even hearing that anyone was able to put UE3 on the Wii, only a version of UE2, but even if that were true, one of the huge advantages of UE4 over UE3 is it's scalability, flexibility, and ease of use. For multiplatform development nowadays, middleware almost has to be all those things to be useful to the wide range of studios and projects. It's why Cryengine 3 runs the gamut from PCs down to iPhones as well. In fact, there is a game in development now for the Wii U using Cryengine 3 and that's why I find it likely that since Epic is going a similar route, that UE4 probably will be running on the Wii U eventually as well.
No Avatar
01 Jan 2013 03:19

kevynwight wrote:Actually the XBox 360 is now in its 8th year. And the PS3 is in its 7th. Like I said, what we've seen so far shows it to be on par. That may certainly change, but I stand by my assertion that it has the hallmarks of being incrementally more powerful than its predecessors, rather than the level of magnitude you might expect.

I look forward to seeing what it can do!

Sorry about that date.

As for it being on par, yes, right now if you completely ignore PS360 launch ports, the fact that devs have had nearly a decade to work with their hardware, and have spent insane amounts of money on getting the most out of them, then you're right, it does only appear to be on par. But that's not how the real world works. In the real world if the the Wii U were simply on par it would be running PS360 games from 2007 or so because without that near decade of experience and huge sums of money dumped into it, developers simply wouldn't have the knowledge to be able to run anything near current PS360 software on the system.

And I'm not looking for any sort of magnitude of power over the existing systems. I would actually be against it if Nintendo had tried to push much more. Sony and MS pretty much went off the wagon with the PS360. They really jumped the graphics shark and because of that the industry hasn't suffered like this since the collapse of '84. Someone needs to reign in budgets or everyone is going to end up going bankrupt. And if I trusted 3rd parties to do it for themselves, we wouldn't have seen what happened on the PS360 in the first place.

lockNES wrote:The Samaritan Demo basically shows they aren't ready to kill off UE3 just yet because it was running on several high-end graphics cards at the time and was only shown off back in 2011. Why put all that money and development into an engine that that don't plan on supporting for a few more years? The reason they've been hyping up UE4 is because they want developers to start moving over sooner than later. The UE4 demo didn't really show anything that was significantly more impressive than the Samaritan demo and UE3 is compatible with DX11. It's basically ready for next-gen. Even if they stop officially supporting it in order to get people to move over to UE4, developers that are really familiar with it will probably use it to make games for the current consoles and/or the next.

I don't remember even hearing that anyone was able to put UE3 on the Wii, only a version of UE2, but even if that were true, one of the huge advantages of UE4 over UE3 is it's scalability, flexibility, and ease of use. For multiplatform development nowadays, middleware almost has to be all those things to be useful to the wide range of studios and projects. It's why Cryengine 3 runs the gamut from PCs down to iPhones as well. In fact, there is a game in development now for the Wii U using Cryengine 3 and that's why I find it likely that since Epic is going a similar route, that UE4 probably will be running on the Wii U eventually as well.

Which still begs the question of why announce it right now at all? As you stated, it's to try and get developers to switch over sooner than later, which is also pretty much what I said as well. However, any developer that does end up targeting UE4 for their future games most likely isn't going to be making a UE3 version for the Wii U. No, they're going to want to be able to build the same game for all systems using the same tools. If there is no Wii U version of UE4 the Wii U will miss out on a certain number of games simply because Epic refused to release the engine for the system. Why would a 3rd party want to spend more money on a Wii U version of their games if they're already convinced that their titles don't sell on Nintendo hardware to begin with?

And how are you so sure that there will be a Wii U version of UE4? There's a Wii U version of CryEngine 3 but that was announced before the system was even released. Right now UE4 is on everything but the Wii U, coincidentally it too was also announced before the Wii U was released, and Epic hasn't given any satisfactory answers as to why it's not currently slated. I don't think the engine is even supposed to be out for a while still, at least not until MS and Sony's next systems are released, so why all the secrecy? What would be the harm in simply letting developers know now that there will be a version for the Wii U so that if they do decide to move over to the engine sooner than later they'll know well in advance that they'll be able to target a Wii U version of their games, if they want to, with little to no issues. Right now, all they're telling developers is that if they're going to be using UE4 they're going to have to either use UE3 or port UE4 themselves if they want to put those games on the Wii U. It's an unnecessary inconvenience that will turn off more than a few developers. And for what?

I don't know. Epic has pretty much admitted that they have no reason, not even a bad one.

View the full discussion!

Quickie Search

"Advanced" Search

Anti-social Tendencies

Advertisements

RSS feed trough

News Feed
Top Stories
Console News
Portables News
Podcast Feed
GoNintendo Radio Feed
Twitter Feed

Affiliates + Friends

Destructoid
Gamersyde
Modojo
TheBitBlock
Anime Your Way